Municipal leaders press for full PURA review of proposed Aquarion sale; RWA offers a compromise
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Municipal coalitions and regional planning organizations urged the Energy and Technology Committee to advance HB 5249 to restore clear legislative intent that PURA should have full regulatory review of Aquarion's proposed sale. RWA and Aquarion representatives filed an offer of compromise including a municipal payment floor, a $10 million rate stabilization fund and OCA staffing commitments; committee members remained split.
A coalition of mayors, regional planning organizations and municipal leaders told the Energy and Technology Committee on Feb. 26 that HB 5249 should clarify legislative intent to preserve the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority’s full statutory authority to review the proposed sale of Aquarion Water Company and the creation of the Aquarian Water Authority (AWA).
MetroCOG and WestCOG representatives — speaking for 24 municipalities that collectively represent about one million residents — said the 2024 special‑session legislation that created the Aquarian Water Authority did not receive the same vetting as a full legislative hearing and that municipalities relied on PURA’s full review power when assessing public‑interest implications. They asked the committee to advance language that explicitly reaffirms PURA’s authority to evaluate the change‑of‑control application under the applicable statutes.
Representatives of the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority and Aquarion countered that their joint offer of compromise — filed in the PURA docket — addresses towns’ key concerns. The offer includes: a guaranteed payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes floor so towns will never receive less than current property‑tax receipts, a dedicated $10 million rate‑stabilization fund to smooth near‑term impacts, preservation of an existing $16 million annual credit in Aquarion’s rates, and a special transition committee to coordinate OCA resources for any new customers. RWA lawyers also said ratings agencies and financing considerations informed their proposed board and transition structure.
Consumer advocates, including the Office of Consumer Counsel, said they remain skeptical about governance and the capacity of the proposed oversight model to match a full PURA review. OCC urged strong consumer protections for any change of ownership, and AARP reiterated concerns about opt‑out municipal aggregation elsewhere on the agenda.
Committee members asked detailed questions about projected rate impacts, whether the RWA/AWA structure could sustain large capital needs while protecting towns’ tax revenue and whether independent oversight could match PURA’s resourcing. No vote was taken; the committee heard substantial debate and follow‑up exchanges are expected.